MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166721545 · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e318166a8e4

Steps to Improve the Teaching of Public Health to Undergraduate Medical Students in Canada

2008· article· en· W2166721545 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ian Johnson, Denise Donovan, Jean Parboosingh

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsToronto Public HealthUniversity of TorontoPublic Health Ontario
FundersFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of SydneyAir Force Materiel CommandHealth CanadaPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsPublic healthAgency (philosophy)CurriculumMedical educationSpecialtyInternational healthPopulationTask (project management)MedicinePublic relationsPolitical scienceHealth educationPsychologySociologyFamily medicineNursingPedagogyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, recent events and global influences have led to an emphasis on enhancing the public health system and improving the training of physicians in public and population health. Responding to the World Health Organization's initiative, Towards Unity for Health, the Association of Faculties of Medicine in Canada launched its Social Accountability initiative in 2001, which included the creation of the Public Health Task Group. With representation from the Public Health Agency of Canada, Canadian faculties of medicine, medical students, the Medical Council of Canada, and the community, the task group undertook four main steps: reaching agreement on common overall objectives for teaching public health, obtaining baseline information on the curricula of programs that were being provided across Canada, obtaining an inventory of resources available at each university, and creating a support system for fostering the development of public health teaching in undergraduate medicine programs. To date, the seventeen medical schools have nearly reached full consensus on the overall educational objectives. An initial scan of existing educational resources revealed no consistent use of any one text. Subsequent work has begun to create an inventory of sharable resources. A network of public health educators has been created and is seen as a promising start to addressing these other concerns. Other barriers remain to be addressed; these include lack of faculty (critical mass), inadequate support for local champions, inadequate methods of student assessment, and poor image as an attractive specialty/few role models.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.290
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.132
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.380 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207